Comments on: Vivisecting “The Flesh”, and the Cult of Science http://www.mythic-cartography.org/2006/11/12/vivisecting-the-flesh-and-the-cult-of-science/ Embrace Heritage Skills from Your Tribal Past Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:13:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2 By: Urban Scout http://www.mythic-cartography.org/2006/11/12/vivisecting-the-flesh-and-the-cult-of-science/#comment-523 Urban Scout Sat, 13 Jan 2007 04:12:17 +0000 http://www.mythic-cartography.org/2006/11/12/vivisecting-the-flesh-and-the-cult-of-science/#comment-523 [...] The College of Mythic Cartography also spoke of this in Vivisecting “the flesh”, and the cult of science: Our Science has propelled an immense productivity in scientific knowledge precisely because it does not consider the universe alive; it proceeds at a meteoric pace, because it need never ask permission of a dead universe, it need never pause in its breakneck progress. Because of this, it will also never know certain things, and actually will perpetuate a blindness of other relationships. The Scientific process actually acts as a ceremony that further inculcates the worldview of a dead universe. [...] […] The College of Mythic Cartography also spoke of this in Vivisecting “the flesh”, and the cult of science: Our Science has propelled an immense productivity in scientific knowledge precisely because it does not consider the universe alive; it proceeds at a meteoric pace, because it need never ask permission of a dead universe, it need never pause in its breakneck progress. Because of this, it will also never know certain things, and actually will perpetuate a blindness of other relationships. The Scientific process actually acts as a ceremony that further inculcates the worldview of a dead universe. […]

]]> By: Urban Scout http://www.mythic-cartography.org/2006/11/12/vivisecting-the-flesh-and-the-cult-of-science/#comment-418 Urban Scout Tue, 02 Jan 2007 01:33:03 +0000 http://www.mythic-cartography.org/2006/11/12/vivisecting-the-flesh-and-the-cult-of-science/#comment-418 This is an exerpt by Louis Liebenberg The Art of Tracking: The Origin of Science The art of tracking may well be the oldest science. As far as written records are concerned, the critical or rationalist tradition of science can be traced back to the early Greek philosophic schools (Popper, 1963). A fully modern brain had evolved at a time when all humans were hunter-gatherers. Yet the same brain that has been adapted for the needs of hunter-gatherer subsistence, today deals with the subtleties of modern mathematics and physics (Washburn, 1978). This apparent paradox may be resolved if it is assumed that at least some hunter-gatherers were capable of a scientific approach, and that the intellectual requirements of modern science were a necessity for the survival of modern hunter-gatherer societies. The art of tracking, as practised by contemporary trackers of the Kalahari, is a science that requires fundamentally the same intellectual abilities as modern physics and mathematics (Liebenberg, 1990). It may even be argued that physicists think like trackers. A characteristic feature of the scientific knowledge of hunter-gatherers is the anthropomorphic nature of their models of animal behaviour. This anthropomorhic element is not necessarily unscientific. On the contrary, it may well be a result of the creative scientific imagination. Anthropomorphic projection has been noted as an essential and important element in scientific work (Holton, 1973). In nuclear physics, the experimenter’s preconceived image of the process under investigation determines the outcome of the observations. This image is a symbolic, anthropomorphic representation of the basically inconceivable atomic processes (Deutsch, 1959). When a scientist has such a visual image, the nature of the seeing or sensing is almost as though he/she felt like the object being visualised (Walkup, 1967). In thinking about a phenomenon they are interested in, some physicists, even in highly abstract theoretical physics, may more or less identify themselves with, for example, a nuclear particle and may even ask: “What would I do if I were that particle?” (Monod, 1975). The symbolic power of useful scientific concepts lies in the fact that many of these concepts have been importing anthropomorphic projections from the world of human drama (Holton, 1973). In the art of tracking the anthropomorphic way of thinking arises from the tracker’s need to identify him/herself with the animal in order to anticipate and predict its movements. The tracker must visualise what it would be like to be that animal within that particular environmental context. In the process of projecting him/herself into the position of the animal, the tracker actually feels like the animal. In doing this the tracker must ask: “What would I have done if I were that animal?”. To be able to do this the tracker must know the animal very well. But in the process the tracker superimposes his/her own way of thinking onto that of the animal, thereby creating a model of animal behaviour in which the animal is understood to have certain human characteristics. Considering the role of the anthropomorphic way of thinking in science, it is by no means obvious why a physicist should think in such a way. On the contrary, it would appear to be a rather paradoxical way to understand highly abstract concepts. On the other hand, it is quite clear why a tracker should think in such a way. This may well suggest that the creative scientific imagination had its origin in the evolution of the art of tracking. The differences between the art of tracking and modern science are mainly technological and sociological. Fundamentally they involve the same reasoning processes. The implication of this is that there is no reason why traditional trackers cannot be employed to conduct research in a modern context. taken from: http://www.cybertracker.co.za/IntegratingKnowledge.html This is an exerpt by Louis Liebenberg

The Art of Tracking: The Origin of Science

The art of tracking may well be the oldest science.

As far as written records are concerned, the critical or rationalist tradition of science can be traced back to the early Greek philosophic schools (Popper, 1963). A fully modern brain had evolved at a time when all humans were hunter-gatherers. Yet the same brain that has been adapted for the needs of hunter-gatherer subsistence, today deals with the subtleties of modern mathematics and physics (Washburn, 1978).

This apparent paradox may be resolved if it is assumed that at least some hunter-gatherers were capable of a scientific approach, and that the intellectual requirements of modern science were a necessity for the survival of modern hunter-gatherer societies.

The art of tracking, as practised by contemporary trackers of the Kalahari, is a science that requires fundamentally the same intellectual abilities as modern physics and mathematics (Liebenberg, 1990). It may even be argued that physicists think like trackers.

A characteristic feature of the scientific knowledge of hunter-gatherers is the anthropomorphic nature of their models of animal behaviour. This anthropomorhic element is not necessarily unscientific. On the contrary, it may well be a result of the creative scientific imagination. Anthropomorphic projection has been noted as an essential and important element in scientific work (Holton, 1973).

In nuclear physics, the experimenter’s preconceived image of the process under investigation determines the outcome of the observations. This image is a symbolic, anthropomorphic representation of the basically inconceivable atomic processes (Deutsch, 1959). When a scientist has such a visual image, the nature of the seeing or sensing is almost as though he/she felt like the object being visualised (Walkup, 1967). In thinking about a phenomenon they are interested in, some physicists, even in highly abstract theoretical physics, may more or less identify themselves with, for example, a nuclear particle and may even ask: “What would I do if I were that particle?” (Monod, 1975).

The symbolic power of useful scientific concepts lies in the fact that many of these concepts have been importing anthropomorphic projections from the world of human drama (Holton, 1973).

In the art of tracking the anthropomorphic way of thinking arises from the tracker’s need to identify him/herself with the animal in order to anticipate and predict its movements. The tracker must visualise what it would be like to be that animal within that particular environmental context. In the process of projecting him/herself into the position of the animal, the tracker actually feels like the animal. In doing this the tracker must ask: “What would I have done if I were that animal?”.

To be able to do this the tracker must know the animal very well. But in the process the tracker superimposes his/her own way of thinking onto that of the animal, thereby creating a model of animal behaviour in which the animal is understood to have certain human characteristics.

Considering the role of the anthropomorphic way of thinking in science, it is by no means obvious why a physicist should think in such a way. On the contrary, it would appear to be a rather paradoxical way to understand highly abstract concepts. On the other hand, it is quite clear why a tracker should think in such a way. This may well suggest that the creative scientific imagination had its origin in the evolution of the art of tracking.

The differences between the art of tracking and modern science are mainly technological and sociological. Fundamentally they involve the same reasoning processes.

The implication of this is that there is no reason why traditional trackers cannot be employed to conduct research in a modern context.

taken from: http://www.cybertracker.co.za/IntegratingKnowledge.html

]]>